Ita/619/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S A S K Brothers Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALOREDATED THIS THE 4[th]DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014 PRESENT THE HON‘'BLE MR. JUSTICE DILIP B BHOSALE AND| THE HON‘'BLE MR. JUSTICE B MANOHAR ITA.NO.619/2007 & ITA.NO.618/2007 | BETWEEN 1.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDINGCENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE 2.THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXCENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), C R BUILDINGCENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), C R BUILDING QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE.., COMMON APPELLANTS (BY SRI ER INDRAKUMAR, SR. STANDING COUNSEL FORSRI EI SANMATHI, ADV.,). AND M/S AS K BROTHERS LTD|(THE ATRIA) NO.1 PALACE ROADBANGALORE | .. COMMON RESPONDENT| (BY SRI A SHANKAR & SRI M LAVA, ADVS)- THIS ITA.NO.619/2007 FILED U/S.260-A OF I.T.ACT,|1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED O2-03-200/7 PASSED INITA NO.1075/BANG/2006 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04, PRAYING THAT THIS HON’ BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO: I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED|THEREIN, I]. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY|THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.1075/BANG/2006 DATED)O2-03-200/7/ & CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE|COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE|DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS ITA.NO.618/2007 FILED U/S.260-A OF I.T.ACT,|1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED O2-03-200/7 PASSED INITA NO.10/74/BANG/2006 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200203, PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO:I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED)THEREIN, I]. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY|THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.1074/BANG/2006 DATED)O2-03-200/7/ & CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE|COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE|DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THESE ITAS COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS’ DAY, DILIP B. BHOSALE J.DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: | PC: These two income tax appeals are directed againstthe order dated 77[5=]March 2007 rendered by Income Tax.Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench “A” (for short “the)Tribunal’)inITANos.10/4 &1075|pertainingCO assessment orders 2002-03 and 2003-04 whereby, the.Tribunal allowed the appeals in part and remanded the)matter to Assessing Officer to consider it afresh in the light.of tne observations made tnerein. 2. Appeals before the Tribunal were directed againstthe order dated 31-10-2006 passed by the Office of the)Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-VI Bangalore (forShort “the Appellate Authority’) for the assessment year|2002-03 and 2003-04. By this order tne Appellate.Autnority dismissed the appeals filed by the respondent-assessee against tne assessment order dated 09-03-2005. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties for|some time and witn their assistance gone through the)orders passed by the Tribunal, the first Appellate Authority|and the Assessing Officer. Insofar the order of Tribunal isconcerned, in our opinion, it is cryptic. The reasons)recorded by the Tribunal for remanding the matter findplace only in paragraph 4. Paragraph No.4 read thus: “4. In view of the above submissions, we areremanding the issue to the file of the Assessing.Officer to verify the claim of the assessee withregard to the investment made in 12%preference shares on which dividend income isnot earned by the assessee and to the extent,they are being not exempted income, theexpenditure|IS|allowable.|Similarly,tneexpenditure incurred on any other investmenton which dividend income is receivable put not.received, the Assessing Officer shall verify andallow the expenditure to that extent.” “4. In view of the above submissions, we areremanding the issue to the file of the Assessing.Officer to verify the claim of the assessee withregard to the investment made in 12%preference shares on which dividend income isnot earned by the assessee and to the extent,they are being not exempted income, theexpenditure|IS|allowable.|Similarly,tneexpenditure incurred on any other investmenton which dividend income is receivable put not.received, the Assessing Officer shall verify andallow the expenditure to that extent.” 4. In the order of Tridunal, wnich run into hardly 3-4|pages, we ado not find that the Tribunal has considered thecase independently on merits, as against the order passed.by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal, in our opinion,|whether or not it agreed with the reasons of the AssessingOfficer, ought to nave recorded its reasons and considered.the matter independently in the light of relevant provisionsof the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the course of argument,|when we so expressed, learned counsel for the partiesfairly agreed for remand of these appeals to the Tribunalfor their consideration afresh. Hence, without recording any further reasons, we dispose of the appeals by thefollowing order: Order passed by the Tribunal in both the appealsdated 22[5=]Marcn 2007 ts set-aside and ITA Nos.10/4 &1075 are restored to file. The Tribunal shall consider theseappeals afresh and dispose them of as expeditiously as)possible and preferably within a period of four monthsfrom the date of receipt of this order. Learned counsel for|tne revenue snall communicate tnis order to tne Tribunal|within a period of four weeks from today. The TribunalShall consider the appeal on merits in accordance witn law|and shall pass a speaking order on merits of the case. Allcontentions of the parties are kept open. In view of this,|we nave not adadresseqd and answered tne supstantiaquestions of law, as formulated in the memorandum of.appeal. The Tribunal may deal with them and dispose ofthe appeals within tne stipulated time. At this stage,|learned counsel for the revenue, fairly states that theAssessing Officer shall not take any coercive action against| ��0�81101100��4;;�=41:318;�3D���0�8::08;1�?@���0��<4?A58;��� �41�1�8�0705��41�8660:�0=�� ��010�8::08;1�8<0�8663<=45>;@�=41:310=�3D���3�631�1�� ����������=�*� ����/����� ��=�*� ����/�����